I recommend reading the whole thing, but let's just see how many of the Four Rules the officers clearly violated, often with catastrophic results. Italics below are mine.

Rule One: All guns are always loaded.

The first accident occurred in February 1989 – less than a month before theguns reached officers on the street. Officer Adam K. Schutz was helping to testand clean the first shipment of guns when he shot himself in the fingers."It bit me," said Schutz, who was left with permanent damage to a finger onhis left hand. "I was moving my hand to lower the slide and it jumped forward. Ihad assumed the gun was unloaded."

Keep in mind that this is someone in the armorer's shop. It gets better.

Rule Two: Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.

In January 1994, homicide detective Jeffrey Mayberry shot Officer James Dukes inthe stomach at police headquarters. "I hear a loud bang and Dukes is slowly falling to the floor," Detective Joseph Fox, Mayberry's partner, said in a deposition. "Jeff jumps up and says, 'Dukes, I didn't mean to do it, I didn't mean to do it.' "Dukes said in a recent interview, "He was playing with the weapon. This was the second time I had told [Mayberry] during that tour of duty not to point the weapon at me."

Sorry, dude. Didn't mean to sweep you with my Glock and plug you in the gut.

Rule Three: Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.

In October 1990, Officer Edward Wise fired accidentally and grazed a man'shead during an undercover drug operation at a Southeast Washington housingcomplex, according to police and court documents. Wise said he had beenstruggling with the man, Barry Braxton, who was unarmed. Braxton sued andcollected a $55,000 settlement from the District.Sabrina Whittle, who wasWise's partner, said in a recent interview that she and her partner were nottaught to keep their fingers off the triggers of their Glocks unless theyintended to fire."The most we had to go on was common sense," said Whittle,then a 21-year-old police rookie, now a security guard. "It was dark and lateand we were scared. I know that, both of us being scared, he had his finger onthe trigger. Obviously, [with] your finger on the trigger, you'reprepared."

Yes, prepared to accidentally shoot someone. The fact that this is in the paper and not buried in some investigation report, and that the former officer doesn't realize how wrong-headed it is - eesh.

Rule Four: Be sure of your target and what is beyond.

In March 1993, Officer Lakisha Poge fired a round through her bed whileunloading a Glock in her apartment, a police report states. The bullet wentthrough the floor and hit Glowdean Catching in the apartment below. Catching,who was wounded in both legs, has a suit pending against the District. Poge, whohas left the department, could not be reached for comment.

In this officer's defense, you could do worse than a bed and a floor as a backstop.

There is nothing magical about being in the military or carrying a badge along with your gun. There are people who invest in safe gun handling and proficiency. Sometimes those people happen to serve in the military or in law enforcement agenices. Sometimes they don't.

Friday, August 28, 2009

ATF changes its mind and will consider permanently attached 1.5" muzzle brakes as part of barrel length to meet the 16" minimum for rifles. In related news, I am not a federal felon.

David Hardy provides a link to the new NRA guide to interstate transportation of firearms and some coverage of the suit against the NYC/New Jersey Port Authority for arresting travelers at airports even though the TSA has said that they are transporting firearms in accordance with federal law.

The posting at AR-15.com is already at eight pages of discussion, but the bottom line is that if you put a round through your wall and it goes through the next three townhouses, expect the law to get involved. Also, Glocks have internal safeties that prevent a discharge upon impact with the floor. Let it drop.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

In my post on Go-Pants I mentioned the importance of having a cell phone (or pocket to carry one) in your home defense kit. In this post, I'll discuss a gadget that makes this easier.

But first, let me clarify: though I didn't mention it, I was certainly armed when the suspicious character in my Go-Pants post knocked on the door. I wouldn't answer the door under these circumstances unarmed. Sebastian voiced this concern, I just wanted to set the record straight.

Back to helpful gear. In this comment, Joe recommends having an old cell phone handy because all cellphones are required to dial 911 free of charge. Sounds like a good idea. I'll have to dig up an old phone and keep it handy.

If you don't mind paying money for an emergency phone, the folks at 911phone.net have you covered. A student brought one of these in to my last legal seminar on self-defense laws in Virginia, and it seemed pretty useful. It comes with a neck lanyard (all the better to record your defensive encounter with while keeping your hands free to manipulate a handgun, flashlight, and guide loved ones to safety) and a single button preprogrammed to dial 911. The price seems a bit steep - $189.95, but there are no monthly fees associated. I'm not sure on dropping the scratch to get one, but if price were no object the simplicity of it is hard to argue with. Here's a picture:

Anyone own one of these things? Is the money worth it or is there some charitable cell phone recycling program that achieves this on the cheap?

You'd think this would go without saying, but some guy in Florida did so rather innocently. In an open carry state like Virginia this is less of a problem, but since Florida has no open carry even casual exposure of a concealed handgun is a big deal. Read the whole thing. (H/T Robb)

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

MSNBC has a reasonably balanced article up on open carry. It starts and ends with an account of the Golden Market shooting down in Richmond, but has a bunch of GOA/SAF/Brady Bunch wrangling in between. On the upside is a parting word from the stop'n'rob clerk from the Golden Market now practicing open carry on a daily basis.

Friday, August 21, 2009

A couple of weeks ago an odd fellow dropped by the house late on a Saturday night claiming to be a travelling salesman named George. He wasn't much of a salesman, and it seemed like a ruse to determine who was home that night and who wasn't. Plus, there was a white van trolling the neighborhood that was probably linked to George. Presumably it contained his accomplices who had plenty of cargo space in their vehicle to cart off televisions and the like.

I called the cops and suited up in my Go-Pants.

What are Go-Pants? Somewhere in between not being armed and strapping on a tactical vest and an AR-15 to survive the zombiepocalypse is a useful set of tools to deal with the problems that present themselves on a more regular basis. If you are out and about running errands, it may be a concealed handgun, a spare magazine, and a cell phone. When things go bump in the night it helps to have an emergency kit set up to deal with it. I'm a firm believer in being able to wear my emergency kit - my Go-Pants.

Go-Pants are what I have staged under my bedside gun safe. Handgun is locked up in a small safe, loaded and equipped with a rail-mounted light. Go-Pants have a retention holster, magazine pouch, two loaded magazines, and a separate flashlight with a neck lanyard. Plus plenty of pocket space to hold a cell phone, keys, and identification. If I have to leave the bedroom during a break-in (not Plan A) I'll be wearing them.

Picture of said Go-Pants below:

Yes, technically they are Go-Shorts - it's summer. I've played with a different name for them, but Readiness Trousers doesn't have the same ring.

Here is Clint Smith of Thunder Ranch describing a similar concept, a pouch with a neck lanyard to hold your spare magazine, cell phone, light, and keys:

The great thing about shooting competitively is that this is essentially my IDPA competition rig. So, all that time spent standing around with a gun on one hip and two magazines on the other isn't wasted - my magazines are where I am used to them being and I've got tools to deal with a lot more than I do with just a gun.

Back to George the Travelling Salesman. The police showed up and took him into custody for unlicensed soliciting. When they came to the door to take a statement from me, I stepped out on to the porch with my Go-Pants on. This is another advantage over carrying your defensive handgun around, a legal one. Open carry is legal in Virginia, but it ought to be done sensibly when the police are called to your location to investigate suspicious activity. A conversation with the police with a gun on your hip and one with a gun in your hand are two entirely different experiences. I'd bet there's a pretty clear change in tenor when you walk out of the front door with a gun in your hand.

Feedback from a friend in law enforcement advises me that I ought to add a cover garment to my kit to avoid being mistaken for the suspicious activity the police are looking for. This seems sensible, especially if something drew me out of the house while they were on their way. I can't think of what that might be, but it's a good reason to stage the whole IDPA kit, vest and all, under the nightstand.

Feel free to give some feedback on what I ought to add to the Go-Pants kit. Does anybody else keep a similar setup handy?

Please contact me to reserve a spot; this class will be limited to 20 people. Email me for reservations and billing information.

For the cost of 200 rounds of .45 ACP (if you can find it) you will get a much deeper understanding of self-defense in the Commonwealth of Virginia from an attorney. Plenty of shooters are willing to invest in their shooting skills but not many invest in their understanding of the legal boundaries of self-defense.

The seminar covers the following topics:

Purchase and possession of arms in the Commonwealth of Virginia

General legal guidelines for the use of force

Justification versus Excuse

Self-defense

Virginia's lack of a "castle doctrine" - and why it (mostly) doesn't matter

Defense of Others

Defense of Property

What is "open carry" and what is "concealed carry" in Virginia? Not quite what you think.

Interacting with Law Enforcement Officers

Travelling armed: planes, trains, and automobiles

What to do when in other jurisdictions: a practical "travelling" mode for reciprocal states

The travelling part is not just one subject; it is covered throughout the brief so that students have an idea how to deal with the laws governing self-defense in other states. The important part is knowing how they generally differ from Virginia (and they differ a lot).

A legal seminar is not a concealed handgun course - it is a legal class on the statutes and case law governing the open or concealed carry of a handgun. This DOES NOT meet the Virginia Concealed Handgun Permit (CHP) requirements. Rather, this is intended for people who already have a CHP but are not versed in the law. If you received your CHP after a basic concealed handgun course with no discussion of the legal implications of using a handgun in self-defense, this is for you.

Disclaimer: The information provided in the seminar is not intended as individualized legal advice. I am not your lawyer. You are not my client. Participation in this seminar is expressly intended NOT to create an attorney-client relationship. Students will sign a waiver and agree to hold harmless Defensive Force Instructors, LLC before class starts.

Monday, August 3, 2009

Had a significant emotional event in my neighborhood Saturday night, one that warranted calling the police to report some suspicious activity. Had the Glock 21, a double-stack .45, on my hip. I figured this was as good an excuse as any to take the 21 out to the range on Sunday instead of the Glock 17 9mm.

My shooting was printing consistently left of where I aimed, which according to this diagram is indicative of the trigger finger not being far enough on the trigger. I attribute this to the heavy range time I get with the slimmer grip of the G17. Though the grips are similar, I wonder if the muscle memory I have on the slimmer grip makes my not put my finger in to the trigger guard far enough on the G21.

Which brings me to the subject of the Glock 21 Slim Frame. Does anybody own both a 17/22 and a 21SF? How much difference is there between the two grips? Is it worth getting a 21SF to reduce the amount of difference between my 9mm grip and my .45 grip?

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Been away from posting for a while. In case you missed it, the attempt to add nationwide concealed carry reciprocity as an amendment to the defense authorization bill failed. Sebastian has the whole story.

Monday, July 20, 2009

So, I'm all settled in to watch debate on the national concealed carry reciprocity amendment, wishing I had a bag of microwave popcorn, when Harry Reid pushes consideration of Senator Thune's amendment back to 9:30 Wednesday morning, debate ending at 12:00. 60 votes required to pass it.

Sunday, July 19, 2009

A stakeout in New Jersey turned into a two-way live fire reenactment of the bank robbery scene from Heat. One of the now-deceased badguys used a Mossberg pump shotgun to wound several officers, a couple severely. The Jersey City police chief has some *insightful* commentary:

"We need help to stop these weapons from hitting the street," said Police ChiefThomas Comey. "This weapon is manufactured for nothing other than to hunt man."

Come on, now. This is the darling of gun controllers everywhere. After all, if you have a pump shotgun, the sine qua non of self-defense firearms according to self-identified gun haters who don't know anything about guns and don't care to learn, you don't need that evil handgun.

This was an argument advanced by the District of Columbia in the Heller case, and one rightly rejected because you can do one critical thing with a handgun that you can't with a shotgun - hold a home invader at gunpoint with one hand and dial 911 with the other.

David Codrea has some related commentary here. Along with a photo of a Mossberg pump shotgun equipped with an ACOG scope meant for engagements beyond 200 meters. Not a setup I use or endorse, but it looks really cool.

The bottom line is that with the right training, any firearm can be an effective tool. Even one with a manually operated action. A lead dispenser is a lead dispenser is a lead dispenser. Allow me to illustrate.

Here's video of Xe's shotgun course and some dude slinging a pump like nobody's business:

Army Marksmanship Unit shooters demonstrating speed reloads:

Practice makes perfect, as the titular competition shooter demonstrates. If you compete in cowboy action shooting, you take a stage name. I present the aptly-named "Lead Dispenser."

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Caleb has a good post up on the differences between Indiana and Michigan concealed carry statutes. Bottom line: don't drink while you're packing in Michigan.

As reciprocity grows, concealed carry requires taking the law of other states into consideration. As a minimum, I consider the following questions before taking a road trip through another state:

1. Is my permit reciprocal/honored? If no, don't carry. Comply with 18 USC 926A. Also, is there a state AWB magazine or ammunition problem with my carry gun?2. As a fallback, is there an allowance for a gun in the glovebox without a permit?3. Can I carry into a restaurant that serves alcohol?4. What is the law on open carry? I say this last one reluctantly - while OC is legal in Virginia and required in restaurants, it is legal but unexercised in other states and will get you a whole lot of unwanted attention.

Part of carrying interstate is also having an idea of what a default set of defensive force laws looks like across the US. I teach this in my concealed carry classes - Virginia law versus what most everyone else does for self-defense. Other states might look to the Model Penal Code for guidance, but not Virginia; we're still living in the year 1620.

On a related note, I am putting on a legal seminar on Saturday, August 22. More information here.

I received a question from a District of Columbia resident about purchasing a firearm. Here is the skinny.

There is one FFL in DC, Charles Sykes. He is available at 301-577-1427. He does not have a storefront yet and runs his business by appointment only.

Someone more knowledgeable with the process described it as such:

1. Go to DC Metro Police Department (MPD) on Indiana Avenue and pick up a gun registration form.2. Go shopping for a handgun wherever you'd like to buy one, e.g. gun store in MD or VA. The gun store should be able and willing to send the gun to Sykes. 3. Make an appointment with Sykes, who looks at the gun, takes $$$ from your friend, and autographs/fills out the form. 4. Go back to DC MPD with the executed form. They approve it, and you go back to Sykes and pick up the gun. 5. Take the gun to MPD, they shoot some rounds out of it, and give it back to you.

The DC MPD website on gun registration is available here. Thanks to the litigation efforts of Alan Gura, District residents are now able to purchase pistols on the California, Maryland, and Massachusetts handgun lists.

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

That would be nice. Thing is, if you need them right now it's too late for a phone call. Brigid has a post up on her walkabout carry rig, a Sig P220 in a Blackhawk SERPA holster.

Some trainers don't allow you to use a SERPA holster in their courses. The theory is that the trigger-finger release lever translates into trigger-finger on the trigger. Which translates into accidental discharge.

I don't have a problem with the SERPA, and use it for open carry. As I've said earlier, I prefer a hybrid holster for concealed carry. Any thoughts on the SERPA? Anybody else see a safety issue with it?

Robbery halted by an armed citizen in Richmond. It seems the robber shot the shopkeeper and threw hellfire and brimstone at some customers for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. A friend of the shopkeeper was open carrying a single-action cowboy gun and fired once, dropping the armed robber. While this does fulfill some of the imagery of the "Wild West" gun control propaganda, it's hard to disagree with the result.

On Saturday, a violent criminal shot a store clerk, had the customers in the store lined up, and while reloading his revolver told the customers that he was going to kill them all.Then a person open carrying a single-action Colt .45 came in and shot the criminal in the stomach, saving at least six or seven lives. I received a detailed account from a VCDL member who was at the scene (but not the person with the .45).One of the things I was told is how some of the customers were telling the police that the open-carrier was a hero and how he saved their lives.If that's not being a first-responder when no one else was there to help, I don't know what is.

It appears that the would-be bandit will be charged with attempted robbery, use of a firearm, and (predictably) possession of a firearm by a felon.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Well, on this map anyway. Uncle reports that the Arizona governor has signed into law a repeal of their restaurant carry ban. Arizona goes green on September 30, Tennessee just went green, and hopefully Virginia will follow suit by this time next year.

41 states allow restaurant carry of some kind; this will make it 42. Kind of puts into perspective that whole "guns in restaurants = booze-fueled mayhem" claim that gun controllers keep pushing.

I have scheduled a legal seminar on Saturday, 22 August, from 10am to 1pm. The seminar will be held at the Marriott Courtyard near Dulles Airport. Location information is available here.

Cost is $75, $65 for members of the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL). Please contact me to reserve a spot; this class will be limited to 20 people. Email me for reservations and billing information. Bring pen and paper to take notes.

For the cost of 200 rounds of .45 ACP (if you can find it) you will get a much deeper understanding of self-defense in the Commonwealth of Virginia from an attorney. Plenty of shooters are willing to invest in their shooting skills but not many invest in their understanding of the legal boundaries of self-defense.

The seminar covers the following topics:

Purchase and possession of arms in the Commonwealth of Virginia

General legal guidelines for the use of force

Justification versus Excuse

Self-defense

Virginia's lack of a "castle doctrine" - and why it (mostly) doesn't matter

Defense of Others

Defense of Property

What is "open carry" and what is "concealed carry" in Virginia? Not quite what you think.

Interacting with Law Enforcement Officers

Travelling armed: planes, trains, and automobiles

What to do when in other jurisdictions: a practical "travelling" mode for reciprocal states

The travelling part is not just one subject; it is covered throughout the brief so that students have an idea how to deal with the laws governing self-defense in other states. The important part is knowing how they generally differ from Virginia (and they differ a lot).

A legal seminar is not a concealed handgun course - it is a legal class on the statutes and case law governing the open or concealed carry of a handgun. This DOES NOT meet the Virginia Concealed Handgun Permit (CHP) requirements. Rather, this is intended for people who already have a CHP but are not versed in the law. If you received your CHP after a basic concealed handgun course with no discussion of the legal implications of using a handgun in self-defense, this is for you.

Disclaimer: The information provided in the seminar is not intended as individualized legal advice. I am not your lawyer. You are not my client. Participation in this seminar is expressly intended NOT to create an attorney-client relationship. Students will sign a waiver and agree to hold harmless Defensive Force Instructors, LLC before class starts.

Robb links to an Examiner column on the Second Amendment, by some guy in New York who claims that the Second Amendment never intended to protect an individual right to keep and bear arms. More nonsense in his earlier article.

Totally ridiculous. He engages in an ahistorical history lesson to tell us that the Founders meant arms for military service only when they clearly didn't, cites one retired justice for the proposition that the Second Amendment doesn't protect an individual liberty, and parses the words of the Second Amendment to say that they have a clearly military meaning.

Heller put all of these kooky revisionist history theories out to pasture. This is flat Earth theory at its finest.

Had he been present at the Constitutional Convention and pushed this viewpoint, one of the Founders would have hauled off and shot him.

Related: I previously wrote on how a militia-centric view of the Second Amendment would not have the effect that gun control proponents think it would.

Thursday, July 9, 2009

A House panel voted to add an amendment allowing guns in public housing. This is a huge policy shift - the Clinton administration made a big deal out of barring guns for Section 8 residents, along with requiring them to submit to warrantless searches and such. It's enough to make you think that the gun control was somehow linked to people control generally...

Money quote:

Carolyn McCarthy , D-N.Y., a longtime gun control advocate, said opponents of the Price amendment would try to remove the language from the bill at a later pointin the legislative process, without subjecting the issue to a recorded vote.

“What we’re trying to do will not involve votes,” McCarthy said.

Wow. Democrats are crossing the aisle to vote for this, and all she can do is hope to kill it procedurally.

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

So this 71-year-old former Marine named James Lovell is at a Subway restaurant in Florida when a significant emotional event transpires:

While John Lovell was finishing up his sandwich around 11:15 p.m. lastWednesday, two masked men armed with guns barged into the restaurant, accordingto a statement from the Plantation police. After taking money from the register,the two men turned to Lovell and demanded his wallet, police said.

As the two tried to force Lovell into the ladies’ room where he thoughthe would be killed, the former Marine reached behind his back to grab his.45-caliber handgun, which he fired seven times at the two men, according to thepolice statement.

Donicio Arrendell, 22, of North Lauderdale, was fatally shot in the headand chest. Frederick Gadson, 21, of Fort Lauderdale, ran from the store after hewas shot in the chest, according to the police statement. A police canine unitfound him hiding next to a nearby bank. He was sent to Broward General Hospitaland was listed in stable condition.

The only reason I can think of to take a stickup customer to the bathroom is an execution. The authorities did not charge Lovell with any crime. In fact, the law swings the other direction here:

Gadson was charged with felony murder and armed robbery. According to Floridalaw, a person charged with a felony, such as armed robbery, resulting in deathcan also be charged with murder.

This is the Felony Murder Rule. Under this merger theory, the getaway driver is culpable for the dead clerk as if he were the trigger man who dropped the hammer. Florida is one of several states that extends liability for the death of one your co-conspirators. So trigger man #1 is liable for the self-defense shooting of trigger man #2.

Monday, July 6, 2009

Fish was hiking, saw another guy, waved, other guy's dogs charged him, he fired a warning shot. Then the other guy charged him, crazed look in eyes, windmilling arms and shouting threats. Fish shouted to halt and, that having no effect, shot him fatally.

Fish was prosecuted for shooting the man. The Arizona legislature tried to help him out by passing a law shifting the burden in self-defense cases, but didn't make their retroactive intent clear. They just passed a new law making it retroactive to address the Fish case, but he has already had his conviction reversed. The law will impose the burden of disproving self-defense on the prosecution (instead of putting it on the defendant to prove it) in a new trial if the governor signs it into law.

Hardy highlights the odd nature of self-defense as a legal defense:

It's rather strange, I can't offhand think of another defense where what matters is what you *think*, but not how things *are*. To prove self-defense you must prove a reasonable fear that the other guy was going to inflict death or serious bodily harm.

This is not unique to Arizona, the jurisdiction where Fish prosecuted and sentenced to ten years in prison. Virginia has a parallel requirement. This is a judgment of what you knew at the time of the use of defensive force, not what may become available for presentation at trial. So when Fish shot Grant Kuenzli, he couldn't justify his actions on the screwdriver in Kuenzli's back pocket. All he had to go on was Kuenzli's verbal threats and that Kuenzli was charging him while whirling his arms in a windmill fashion.

It turns out that Fish had good reason to be afraid. As his defense counsel points out:

Witness after witness, in pretrial motions, and under oath, provided this Court with "specific act" evidence about the character for violence of Grant Kuenzli. The decedent raped and kidnapped [Rape Victim], then threatened her son with death as well as her mother and sister while hold [Rape Victim] and her son hostage in their home. The decedent, without any warning, assaulted and strangled [strangulation victim] without provocation and without warning. [strangulation victim]'s offense was simply delivering self help materials to [Rape Victim]. The decedent was involved in numerous violent or aggressive encounters with former police officers Steve Corich, John Boylan, and Lynn Bray at Mesa Community College. They were so troubled by these actions that they contacted defense counsel after reading news accounts of Kuenzli's death. The decedent had two aggressive confrontations with Placido Garcia who, through affidavit, described his fears to the court. Stephanie Quincy was so terrified of the defendant because of bizarre and threatening behavior over the telephone that she would not meet with him face to face unless he had cleared court security. Judge Clayton Hamblin had a twenty minute encounter in his courtroom that so terrified him that he warned court staff to be beware of Kuenzli and to be cautious of him. The judge feared that the decedent might shoot him through a window connected to his courtroom. Ernie Encinas terminated the decedent from employment at the Gilbert Fire Marshall's office because of repeated violent outbursts with Mr. Encinas, with fellow employees, and with customers of the town. The fear of Kuenzli was so prevalent that the Fire Marshall changed all of their locks at all locations at the request of Kuenzli’s fellow employees because of fears that Mr. Kuenzli would return and inflict harm. A mere two weeks before his death, decedent charged Steve James with James observing the same spastic arm movements, the terrifying anger and verbiage, and the irrational behavior that was seen on May 11, 2004. These specific acts were critical to show, on occasion after occasion, that rational people could not reason with Grant Kuenzli, that he had character patterns of uncontrolled violent behavior, and that Kuenzli inflicted terror in the minds and hearts of each of these witnesses because of his unpredictable volatility and patterns of violence and aggression.

Even though Fish didn't know any of the above when the shooting took place, it appears that Kuenzli probably conveyed an earnest (and unnerving) intent to kill Fish. Problem is that none of it was admitted at trial.

The prosecution also made hay about Fish carrying a 10mm handgun loaded with hollowpoint ammunition. In an urban area, that may not be your preferred carry gun. But on a hiking trail that is probably the caliber of choice. It's enough bullet to drop most any four-legged predators you may encounter, and the hollowpoint round is a good choice both for stopping power and to prevent overpenetration. As Massad Ayoob has said at length, overpenetration and hitting an innocent on the other side can bring a lot of liability. Let's be honest, 10mm FMJ is a hot round that makes Rule Four (be sure of your target and what lies beyond it) a serious consideration. There's a good faith argument that not using hollowpoints in a 10mm is reckless. But be prepared to make that argument in court.

All of this goes to show that even when you use force in what you believe to be justified self-defense, the justice system may see things differently.

Sunday, July 5, 2009

The Firearm Blog highlights a new California-legal AR-15 made by Daniel Defense. It has a magazine release that can only be triggered by a bullet tip or similarly-shaped tool so that it does not violate California's "assault weapon" ban.

While it's easy to make fun of re-engineering rifles to meet goofy legal standards, Daniel Defense deserves credit for supporting the gun culture in California. It's an uphill battle.

This interview with Alan Gura highlights the other front in the war on California gun laws: the District Court for the District of Columbia.

D.C. copied California's gun laws and pasted them into their own firearm regulations. This includes the roster of "safe" handguns that California maintains. Their definition of "safe" is pretty nonsensical; a gun that is perfectly "safe" in an all-black finish is "unsafe" in a two-tone finish. The District just relented and decided that they will expand the list to all guns similar to the ones on California's list as well as the guns on Maryland and Massachusetts lists and all guns made prior to 1985.

As a follow-up to my last post on the post-Heller world we are living in, here's a link to an interview at Reason with Alan Gura, the attorney who argued Heller at the Supreme Court.

California gun laws figure heavily in the push to drag Second Amendment jurisprudence into the modern age. Because the three-judge panel in Nordyke v. King held that the Second Amendment was incorporated against the states, California's list of "safe" weapons is being challenged as well as their "may-issue" concealed carry practices.

Volokh makes the point that the traditional framework used for judicial scrutiny in other instances may not be appropriate for firearms. We use strict scrutiny for race, intermediate scrutiny for gender, and rational basis for other issues. This may not carry over well to firearm regulations, and Volokh does a good job of parsing out the kinds of constitutional standards that may develop.

Sebastian over at Snowflakes in Hell takes issue with the article's discussion of assault weapon bans. I will just note that the Heller case was a watershed event. We are no longer discussing lightweight "collective rights" arguments that write the Second Amendment out of the Constitution. We are having an honest discussion about the contours of a recognized individual liberty. After the Court gets around to incorporating the Second Amendment against the states we will see an even more rational public discourse on guns.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

In this post, Greg and Beth link to an attorney discussing a recent decision regarding a man in Florida convicted of unlicensed concealed carry. A man in the common area of his apartment complex was threatening everybody around with death and empty beer bottles, so he called 911 and confronted the man with his handgun. He holstered the handgun as police arrived, not wanting to have it in his hand and alarm the police and not wanting to leave it on the ground for the drunk assailant to pick up. The police show up and he is charged with ... wait for it ... carrying a concealed weapon. His shirt covered the weapon and his carry permit had expired - so it was unlicensed concealed carry. Open carry is illegal in Florida, period. So I don't know what the guy could have done. From the lawyer's write-up, it appears that his defense counsel wasn't that great and the appellate court opinion makes reference to the judge taking note of the defendant's demonstrated proficiency with guns several times. Anti-gun judge + bad defense lawyer = conviction?

In totally unrelated news, police officers arrived at the apartment of a woman fighting off her irate ex-boyfriend. Her restraining order didn't prevent his attack. Go figure. Anyway, the police show up as the ex is about to stab her and shoot at him. They end up hitting her and the police bullet is listed among the causes of death. Worse yet: she was pregnant.

Monday, June 29, 2009

The eeeevil .50 caliber Barrett sniper rifle is demonized regularly when gun control advocates are pushing for new gun laws to save our neighbors across the Rio Grande. Here's some representative hysteria from the Violence Policy Center. The LA Times has had better coverage than most, and the article at the link mentions all of the black market guns not coming from the US.

Where could these things be coming from? Perhaps these guys have an idea:

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Over at the Coalition To Stop Gun Violence website, there is a post up on recasting the Second Amendment as a mandate for militia service. If executed faithfully, this would be a great idea, since every able-bodied male (probably females too, given sex-discrimination jurisprudence) would get a militia-compatible rifle, possibly a pistol, and a bunch of ammunition out of the deal. This new twist on gun control would actually increase the availability of guns and call into question the validity of any “assault weapon” legislation, since those are exactly the arms required for militia service.

The post says that Heller somehow provides a mandate to register all guns and, a la the Militia Act of 1792, all citizens would be enrolled in the militia. Apparently this is supposed to ban private sales of firearms and stop guns going down to Mexico.

A faithful return to the militia model of the early Republic won’t happen. However, the idea merits some discussion. I will cover the firearm implications, how a reduced standing army might impact our foreign policy, and what this new militia model is really about.

Uniform Militia Firearms (Rifles for Everybody)

When you read the Militia Act of 1792, you find that a good deal is about dictating force structure and armament of individual soldiers. If we are to move to a Swiss-style militia, this means our firearms and ammunition have to be compatible. And paid for by Uncle Sam if you can’t provide your own.

I’m not pulling this out of thin air. During my time in Afghanistan, I recruited, trained, and led a 128-man force of local militia in combat. I also trained, advised, and assisted three companies (about 200 men) of Afghan National Army soldiers at the Pakistani border.

When my detachment first began recruiting fighters, we had a room full of outdated and decrepit guns in odd calibers and very few magazines or machine gun links to string our bullets together. We didn’t have many bullets either.

My collection of oddball World War II-era machineguns was insufficient. I needed modern calibers, modern rifles, and compatible magazines. A renewed citizen militia would need the same.

This mathematical combination of Miller (the government can prohibit unregistered ownership of firearms unsuitable for militia service) + Heller (individuals have the right to keep and bear arms) dictates that privately-owned rifles be compatible with what our soldiers have.

The first requirement is ammunition. Militia rifles must be chambered in standard NATO calibers. If you want to get a large caliber hunting rifle, that’s on your own dime. Pistols would have to be chambered in 9mm or .45. Since these are the calibers the military stocks, we would have these available for citizens to practice with when they attend militia drills.

The second requirement is magazine compatibility. Magazine compatibility for pistols is not a strict requirement; the military purchases pistols from a number of manufacturers. Rifles are a different matter. Citizens would have to be able to feed their rifles with the 30-round magazine designed for AR-15 rifles, which are semi-automatic versions of our standard service rifle.

The other feature (or bug, to some) is that the federal government would provide weapons for those that could not afford them. As David Hardy notes, the Virginia Militia Act did this and the deliberations over the federal law took this into account; it was deemed unnecessary since there were so few men who did not have arms. That is not the case anymore – time for a bailout of the unorganized militia!

Reduced Standing Army

Our new “Homeland Security Militia Reserve Act” would have the advantage of making the United States impossible for a foreign army to invade and occupy. If we returned to the small standing army associated with our nation’s early days, we would also take ourselves out of the world policeman business.

The Militia Act of 1792 made sure we had decent defensive capabilities but limited our ability to engage in expeditionary warfare. The militias called up for the Spanish-American War trained up but many fought their deployment orders because they would be overseas when their mobilization periods expired. Several protested any deployment outside of their state borders.

The federal government responded by passing the Militia Act of 1903, also known as the Dick Act. The Dick Act moved state militias toward our modern National Guard model, with mandatory drills, annual training exercises, and unit inspections by regular army officers.

Later reforms further federalized the President’s control of part-time soldiers. Reserve units are completely under federal control. The National Guard and Naval Militia make up the “organized militia.” Though these are state units, the President trumps the state governor when they are federalized. Perpich v. Dept. of Defense. Able-bodied males and female members of the National Guard make up the “unorganized militia.”

The only units that remain under state control are State Defense Forces, state-organized units often made up of volunteers. Perpich makes the point that even these could be subject to call-up under federal statute.

So, a move to a militia system is a major restructuring of our military and might be a good thing. A return to universal part-time service and the limitations of a real “homeland security” militia make it impossible for us to wage wars of choice. There's no way you could convince the citizen-soldiers that we need to head off to another Somalia or impose peace in Darfur.

The Real Motive

Now that we’ve explored the real implications of a return to the traditional militia model, what is this all really about?

Gun control. This is explicit in the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence post: “There are no libertarian individual rights in a conscript military organization.” Once you own your guns pursuant to the federal militia authority, the chain of command makes gun control pretty efficient.

The problem with this idea is that it misreads Heller. Or doesn’t read Heller. It’s not like the answer is buried in a footnote. You can’t get past the syllabus without finding a flat refutation of this militia model. “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.”

Sorry if the title got your hopes up. I doubt a Second Amendment stimulus is in the works.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Here's the deal. I shoot competition with a full-size Glock, I carry a compact Glock. I'm committed to the platform because common ergonomics translate into proficiency when I switch between the guns.

But the sights are different. For competition, an iron rear with fiber-optic front works better than any other configuration I've seen. But I carry with a different set-up - TFO Tritium Fiber Optic Sights. I'll illustrate the spread of options here.

These are the "dot and bucket" factory Glock sights - the picture gives them more credit than they are probably worth because the front sight caught all of the flash. In a low-light defensive situation they probably wouldn't be worth that much.

With a good amount of light the single red dot in front is very precise; it tracks, traverses, and stands out well against most any background.

The picture doesn't do them justice - the front sight really catches the light and focuses your vision. I've shot the Smith & Wesson IDPA indoor match with these sights; if you're using a flashlight or have a reasonable amount of ambient light the difference between this and a tritium sight is huge and in the fiber optic's corner.

Here are my current carry sights.

They are TRUGLO Tritium Fiber Optic (TFO) sights - a bit of tritium and a fiber optic rod to pick up the light the tritium puts off. Theoretically, they should be the best carry sights available. However, the big dots aren't very precise, and the front sight is fainter than the rear sights after a few years. Plus, I'm used to looking at one dot in a slot, not aligning three dots. I'm seriously considering moving to one dot made of fiber optic, one dot of tritium, or Heinie's top & bottom dot alignment.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

A convenience store owner shot and killed an intruder this weekend down in Suffolk; the local newspaper headline notes that the suspected burglar was not armed with a gun.

The store owner claims that he shot in self-defense and I won't speculate as to whether it was or was not; the comments below the article are pretty vitriolic as it is.

What I will say is that he is in a significantly better position if the self-defense claim is deemed credible by the Commonwealth's Attorney or, if things go that far, the jury. The Virginia Supreme Court has held that brandishing a firearm in defense of your property is assault; it follows that using lethal force to protect your property may incur serious criminal (and civil) liability.

By gun control logic, Jamaica has no excuse for gun crime problems. As Dave Kopel explains:

Jamaica played that card out when it replaced an already-restrictive gunlicensing system with the Firearms Act and the Gun Court Act of 1974. The Actsprovided for gun confiscation, house-to-house searches, incommunicado detention,secret trials, warrantless searches and seizures, and mandatory lifetime prisonsentences for the possession of even a single bullet.

Gun courts sprung up in the Northeast, symptoms of a concerted effort to stigmatize firearms and ultimately their lawful ownership under increasingly restrictive gun control laws. Good thing we don't have anybody in a position of power who would summarily deprive people of their gun rights without due process:

Sebastian points out that New Zealand has embraced the "assault weapons" nonsense and intends to make it harder to obtain semi-automatic firearms with pistol grips. Sebastian rightly notes that this is the wrong feature to focus on - perhaps a selector switch that allows fully automatic fire makes more sense.

Never mind all that - this is textbook gun control at work. Go check out the Violence Policy Center's website. The conclusion to their study on "assault weapons" says it in black and white:

The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.

More "common sense" gun control at work. Expect some Mexico nonsense to make this issue come back on the home front.

Sunday, June 21, 2009

The point is that cheap nylon holsters don’t hold the gun in a consistent location. For self defense or competition shooting, the butt of the gun needs to present in the same place every time, regardless of whether or not you’ve been moving around, getting in or out of a car, etc.

I have had positive experiences with carrying in a hybrid holster. The base of the holster is leather, giving a flat surface against your hip. A kydex shell is bolted to the leather base, along with belt clips. This allows all-day carry without the sensation of a Glock merging with your hip bone. The holster is IWB (Inside the Waistband), the clips are tuckable so that you can wear a shirt over the whole rig - you would untuck the shirt to draw.

Mine is "The Answer" from Tucker Gunleather. I have had the holster for about four years and to my knowledge have never been "made" while carrying with this and a shirt or vest on top. The holster holds the profile of the gun close to your body at the 4 o'clock position. The kydex body provides the satisfying *snik* sensation when the gun moves all the way into the holster. The trigger guard is the key part of the gun that mates up with the kydex shell and the bottom is open, so this can accommodate any 9mm/.40 S&W/.357 Sig Glock.

Here is the holster by itself:

Here is the holster with Glock inside:

Here is the back side of the holster, the part that sits against your body:

Uncle covered this online holster brouhaha a bit. He has a similar holster, the Comp-Tac MTAC. Uncle provided a review here, with an update and feedback on their customer service. Uncle had a problem with the contour of the holster pressing the magaine release. I have had no such problems with The Answer.

I have only one complaint with The Answer: the screws holding the belt clips can come loose after a full day of wear - not enough for the holster to fall apart in your pants, but after you take it off they need to be tightened.

If the good folks at Comp-Tac would be so kind as to donate an MTAC, I would be happy to write up the ensuing showdown between hybrid holsters.

Saturday, June 20, 2009

Richard Mann recently asked whether a handgun's slide-stop serves a practical purpose or if it is just an administrative function of the handgun.

Here at TDHB, we see it as a practical tool for the simple reason that it lets you know that you are out of ammunition and need to reload. In the endless debate over the respective merits of the AR vs. the AK, the AK loses out on reloads because it does not lock the bolt to the rear when the last round in the magazine is fired (unless you find some magazines with specialized followers - I have some Yugo mags that do this).

The loudest sound you will ever hear is a click when you expect a bang (or a bang when you expect a click).

While Mr. Mann may be comfortable with removing the slide stop from his Glock, I'll keep mine installed.

I'm a former action guy and attorney who shoots in competition matches. I teach the legal portion of some NRA courses and teach my own concealed carry courses tailored to the law of self-defense in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Email me if you are interested in a course.I will focus this blog on defensive tactics, legal considerations for self-defense, and generally improving your shooting. Politics may creep in from time to time, but they are not the focus.Disclaimer: I am not your attorney. You are not my client. Anything posted on this blog is for informational purposes only and is not to be construed as individualized legal advice. Readers of this blog agree to hold harmless the author of this blog and Defensive Force Instructors, LLC.

About Me

I am a former Special Forces soldier, International Defensive Pistol Association Master-Class competitor, and an attorney in Virginia. I teach NRA certified handgun courses and specialized concealed carry courses on the side. This blog focuses on lawfully carrying a concealed handgun, pistol competition (IDPA and
USPSA) and the legal aspects of self-defense. The views expressed on this blog are solely those of the author.

DISCLAIMER:I am not your lawyer. You are not my client. The information provided on this blog is for informational purposes only.Readers agree to hold harmless the author of this blog and Defensive Force Instructors, LLC.